Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > General Efficiency Discussion
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-07-2018, 03:30 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Texas
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
LRR Tires. My Experience

I purchased a used 2016 Prius 2, not the eco, on Feb.11 2017. It has 18xxx miles on it. The tires were the Toyo Nanoenergy A29 P195/65R-15. In Feb of this year the tires were in need of replacement. I have put on a little over 63,000 miles in one year. I drive for Uber and Lyft. I put over 5,000 miles a month on the car.
I went online and found some tires on sale at NTB. Buy 3 get one free. Sumitomo HTR A/S P02. They are a 65,000 mile tire.
I noticed within a few miles that my MPG had dropped, it was at 48mpg according to the readout on the car. CRAP! After driving around delivering people I got it up to 52 mpg. Crap! again. Something is not right. I am always between 58 and 63 mpg. The next day I figured things would be better. NOPE! I could not get above 52.4 mpg. I knew it had to be the tires. Nothing else had changed. I called NTB and told them I would be returning the tires. Why? Because the are sucking my gas away.
After doing some searching via google I determined that the Toyo tires I had originally were LRR tires. Shopped around and found the best price at Tire Rack .com.
Had them installed at Firestone and returned the other tires to NTB. They gave me the money back for the tires and tax only.
Immediately my gas mileage went back up into the 58 to 63 mpg range.
LRR tires are worth the money.

  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to iamgeo For This Useful Post:
Daox (03-12-2018), Natalya (03-10-2018), Piwoslaw (03-08-2018)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 03-07-2018, 03:44 PM   #2 (permalink)
EcoModding Newb
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,914

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 31.25 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 79.06 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 28.95 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,503
Thanked 1,206 Times in 829 Posts
So that's about a 13% reduction in fuel economy.

Things to consider:

New tires always get poor fuel economy until they wear in a little.
Measure the circumference of the new tire vs old. A larger circumference will under-report distance travelled and throw off speed and MPG estimates.

Certainly the non-LRR tires resulted in a reduction in MPG, but I find it difficult to believe 13% less. I would think different tires would account for only a 5% or less difference.

Factor in the fact that you'll have to replace the tires more frequently. That's a big cost that could offset fuel savings.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
Xist (03-07-2018)
Old 03-07-2018, 08:19 PM   #3 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Texas
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Redpoint5, you would be wrong in your assumption. I lived it. I know my car. The drop in mileage was very surprising to me. The fact that the mileage went back up to my "normal" proves that the tires sucked as far as mpg goes. Why do you think I will be replacing tires more frequently?
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2018, 09:50 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,346

Traverse 2LT FWD - '12 Chevrolet Traverse 2LT
90 day: 21.2 mpg (US)

Volt, gas only - '12 Chevrolet Volt Premium
90 day: 41.98 mpg (US)

Volt, electric only - '12 Chevrolet Volt Premium
90 day: 132.98 mpg (US)
Thanks: 123
Thanked 287 Times in 193 Posts
If you run the math, a worn out tire in that size will over report miles by 2% vs a brand new tire with full tread depth. I.E., it will appear the vehicle is getting better mileage than it actually is.

LRR vs non-LRR mpg will certainly show up on high mpg cars, but new tires WILL consume more energy than worn tires.

And finally, they're sumitomo, what did you expect?
__________________




  Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2018, 11:25 PM   #5 (permalink)
Tyrant-at-large
 
Vman455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 979

Little Red - retired - '05 Honda Civic EX
90 day: 49.03 mpg (US)

Pope Pious the Prius - '13 Toyota Prius Two
Team Toyota
90 day: 53.99 mpg (US)
Thanks: 84
Thanked 825 Times in 410 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamgeo View Post
I knew it had to be the tires. Nothing else had changed.
*facepalm*

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamgeo View Post
The fact that the mileage went back up to my "normal" proves that the tires sucked as far as mpg goes.
*double facepalm*
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 05:42 AM   #6 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,346

Traverse 2LT FWD - '12 Chevrolet Traverse 2LT
90 day: 21.2 mpg (US)

Volt, gas only - '12 Chevrolet Volt Premium
90 day: 41.98 mpg (US)

Volt, electric only - '12 Chevrolet Volt Premium
90 day: 132.98 mpg (US)
Thanks: 123
Thanked 287 Times in 193 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vman455 View Post
*facepalm*



*double facepalm*
Correlation is not causation.
__________________




  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ksa8907 For This Useful Post:
Vman455 (03-13-2018)
Old 03-08-2018, 06:55 AM   #7 (permalink)
Duck duck duck
 
RedDevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Posts: 2,495

Red Devil - '11 Honda Insight Elegance
Team Honda
90 day: 58.8 mpg (US)

It - '09 Hyundai I10 Active Cool
Team Hyundai
90 day: 32.34 mpg (US)
Thanks: 907
Thanked 1,028 Times in 671 Posts
By the way, there should be no difference in distance reported between new and worn tires, even though the new tires have a slightly larger circumference.

Amazing, no?

Consider this: A tire on a car is not a perfect circle. The contact patch is flattened out, and there the tread shrinks; the grooves narrow as the lugs get squeezed together.

By and large the distance a wheel travels with each rotation is the same as the length of the steel belts in the tire. The distance between the belts and the tread surface has no influence; again, the contact patch is flat.

Actually, if anything it is the other way round.
As my tires wear I see a very gradual reduction in the reported distance of my commute on the odometer. The same route that was 35.6 km when the tires were new now takes just 35.4 km.
I bet the belts have been stretched ever so slightly.

Worn tires slightly underreport the mileage.
__________________
2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut.
lifetime FE over 0.13 Gm or 0.08 MM.


Last edited by RedDevil; 03-08-2018 at 07:57 AM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RedDevil For This Useful Post:
freebeard (07-12-2018), redpoint5 (03-08-2018)
Old 03-08-2018, 07:23 AM   #8 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 5,815

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Shocker - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 136.71 mpg (US)
Thanks: 133
Thanked 1,460 Times in 1,086 Posts
Supposedly it can take up to 4,000 to 5,000 miles to break in tires to get normal gas milage.
Worn tires get the best mileage.
Seeing a 13% different is a little bit of a surprise. I would have guessed up to 10% max.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white 240v evse mod, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 07:30 AM   #9 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 5,815

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Shocker - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 136.71 mpg (US)
Thanks: 133
Thanked 1,460 Times in 1,086 Posts
Added this to the wiki.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white 240v evse mod, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2018, 08:56 AM   #10 (permalink)
Tire Geek
 
CapriRacer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Let's just say I'm in the US
Posts: 682
Thanks: 0
Thanked 266 Times in 170 Posts
A couple of points:

1) LRR is not an absolute term. It means "better fuel economy compared to other tires with the same traction and wear characteristics".

So it is quite possible to get worse fuel economy with a tire labeled LRR than one not so labeled.

2) For tires, there is a technological triangle involving treadwear, traction and rolling resistance. In order to get good values in one area, one or both of the others has to be sacrificed.

3) OEM tires almost always have really good fuel economy, but they do that by sacrificing traction and/or treadwear. That's why OE tires are considered poor quality - the goal was good F/E, not good wear.

The OE tire mention by the OP (Toyo Nanoenergy A29) has a UTQG rating of 300 A B. The treadwear rating is really low.

4) As tires wear, the RR decreases. So getting new tires should always result in a loss of F/E - all other things being equal.

5) There is no break in for RR in tires. The first few thousand miles have fairly rapid wear, so the F/E improves quickly as the tread is worn away, but RR continues to improve until it reaches its best numbers just before being worn out.

__________________
CapriRacer

Visit my website: www.BarrysTireTech.com
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CapriRacer For This Useful Post:
Daox (03-12-2018), redpoint5 (03-08-2018)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com